Spanking unbiblical ?
Yet another country is preparing to deny parents the right to discipline their children by spanking.
Under the headline "No justification for hitting kids - NGOs", we found an article today ( http://iafrica.com/news/sa/344713.htm) in which a reverend and spokesperson for the SA Council of Churches actually states that "attempts to justify corporal punishment through biblical "proof texts" (...) bordered on the unchristian, irreligious and unorthodox", since Jesus doesn't "promote physical punishment as a justifiable means of discipline" in the New Testament, and "the Old Testament reflected patriarchy and slavery as the norm, and warfare as a way of solving problems" implying that it therefore could not be used as a valid proof text: "It was problematic to attempt to transplant that text to a culture three or four thousand years later. Interpretations of sacred writings were always dynamic, and reflected the times in which that interpretation took place", the spokesman is paraphrased.
The article then goes on quoting some lady from an allegedly influential NGO who speaks about "hitting children" and "abuse", about the dangerous effects of teaching children that "violence was a solution to conflict", and about a general fight against violence in the country. Concerning the "large backlash against the proposed ban" that came from "some Christian leaders (...) claiming that parents had not only a right, but also a duty to beat their children", she states that "this is frightening in the context of the current levels of violence against children in South Africa, and completely irresponsible".
The article closes by mentioning that all this was part of a global campaign. "According to the Global Campaign to End All Corporal Punishment of Children, 18 countries have passed legislation-protecting children from all corporal punishment. They include New Zealand and the Netherlands, both of which took the step this year, the Ukraine, Germany, Israel and Sweden."
There are several things to address about this article.
For one, we see a reverend as a false teacher, doing what you expect a false teacher to do: teaching. He feels comfortable with doing away with God's law on the grounds that Jesus never mentioned this aspect of it, as if Jesus and God who gave us the Law were two different Law-Givers, as if God, Christ Jesus, was not the same, yesterday, today and forever (Heb 13:8). The Law given to Moses was Jesus' Law as much as it was the Father's Law. Jesus came to confirm, not to do away with God's eternal law-word for His children. But this reverend refers to the Old Testament as faulty in other instances too, it seems, thus claiming that we cannot rely on it anymore.
His examples to discredit the Old Testament, patriarchy, slavery and war, all not "the norm" anymore, would all be worth considering at length, but let me just be brief here:
God chose patriarchs to lead their families in Godly ways, and the fact that we place more value on the state and the church today than on the family has led to much of society's problems. Society chose a "better" way than God's way, and see what the results are.
Slavery as referred to here is clearly an abomination in the bible (it is called man stealing and punishable by death, Deu 24:7), whereas the slavery promoted in the bible, "indentured servitude", has much more in common with modern day employment situations, only that employees are worse off today in many ways.
War that the children of Israel fought was war explicitly commanded by God so that His enemies would be destroyed, the seed of the Nachash, the peoples that were given up to the fallen sons of God, the giant tribes, those that were not God's allotment:
So these examples have to be viewed from today's perspective in order to be held against God, so to speak, and that's exactly what that reverend does. He pulls the cultural argument in order to do away with God's law and feel good about it. Oh well.
As for the lady quoted later on, she too lumps something that is biblical (chastising) in with something that is certainly unbiblical (abuse), and thus discredits what God has commanded, just like the reverend does with his examples. This is an underhanded approach.
God commands fathers to teach their children and to lead their houses well, and to discipline everyone that is under his care if need be, so that they might not end up in hell, but that he can present his family unblemished on the Last Day. This includes wives and children. What this lady refers to though is abusive child beating, and not chastising or disciplining. Certainly disciplining is nothing a parent likes to do, and if it is necessary, the goal is to set the one that went astray back onto God's path. So the reasons for spanking are limited to what goes against God's Law, and are by no means arbitrary. If daily spanking is necessary, the parents have failed tremendously in their attempt to raise their children in a godly way, which is where the churches should see their field of expertise instead of ranting against God's Law: Teaching God's word to the fathers, so that they might lead their wives and children well.
Another thing that is of course left out in the article is the age from which onward a child is accountable to God's law - between the age of 12 and 13, that is. Before that, spanking a child is not a duty for Christian parents. But such distinctions are not mentioned, of course.
Finally, her argument that disciplining a child would teach that violence is a form of solving conflicts is rather ridiculous. Beating a child in anger certainly leads to such outcome, or beating a child without any reason at all or for just any reason according to their whim. If that is the way they raise their children, it is ungodly and doesn't have anything to do with discipline as commanded by God at all. So she complains about social problems, and thus justifies her stand against God's word, even calling it irresponsible to follow God's lead.
We cannot but think that people who proclaim such false and corrupt teaching and entice others to follow it are given up to this fate. When accounts will be settled on the Last Day, they will have to answer for all they have done like everybody else. And leaders will be judged more strictly than the flock itself, for they do not only put guilt on their own head, but on all the people they are leading...
This is Old Testament teaching, and James repeats it, but I can hear the argument already: "This of course must also be viewed in a cultural light, since the New Testament times are all over and gone for such a long time too by now..."
Let me ask you though:
Why would Jesus insist that "Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." (Mat 5:18)?
And why would Paul say that "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2Ti 3:16)?
Technorati Tags: SA Council of Churches, Global Campaign to End All Corporal Punishment of Children, spanking, chastisement, discipline, false teachers, slavery, patriarchy, God's Law, Joshuah's House
